K.S.A. » Chapter 60
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 60-422 (2026)

Further limitations on admissibility of evidence affecting credibility

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

60-422. Further limitations on admissibility of evidence affecting credibility. As affecting the credibility of a witness (a) in examining the witness as to a statement made by him or her in writing inconsistent with any part of his or her testimony it shall not be necessary to show or read to the witness any part of the writing provided that if the judge deems it feasible the time and place of the writing and the name of the person addressed, if any, shall be indicated to the witness; (b) extrinsic evidence of prior contradictory statements, whether oral or written, made by the witness, may in the discretion of the judge be excluded unless the witness was so examined while testifying as to give him or her an opportunity to identify, explain or deny the statement; (c) evidence of traits of his or her character other than honesty or veracity or their opposites, shall be inadmissible; (d) evidence of specific instances of his or her conduct relevant only as tending to prove a trait of his or her character, shall be inadmissible.

History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-422; January 1, 1964.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 90 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1967–2026 · leading case: State v. Sampson, 301 P.3d 276 (Kan. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Sampson, 301 P.3d 276 (Kan. 2013). · cites it 10× “60-421 and K.S.A. 60-422 in refusing to admit evidence of an accomplice’s conviction.”
State v. Atkinson, 80 P.3d 1143 (Kan. 2003). · cites it 8× “The rules of evidence, specifically K.S.A. 60-422, prohibit their admission. The majority relied upon K.”
State v. Frantz, 521 P.3d 1113 (Kan. 2022). · cites it 8× “Relevant here, K.S.A. 60-422 excludes evidence of any character trait other than honesty or veracity, and it prevents a party from establishing a witness' character traits through specific instances of conduct: "As affecting the credibility of a witness .”
State v. Penn, 201 P.3d 752 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 13× “” K.S.A 60-422 limits the admissibility of evidence affecting the credibility of a witness.”
State v. Osby, 793 P.2d 243 (Kan. 1990). · cites it 10× “2d 738 (1987); (2) even if the prior testimony is admissible under K.S.A. 60-422, it can only be used to examine the witness, and it is not independently admissible once the witness leaves the witness stand; and (3) while use of prior testimony is authorized under the hearsay…”
State v. Swint, 352 P.3d 1014 (Kan. 2015). · cites it 5× “2d 1288 (1989) (holding victim in sex crime case may be cross-examined about prior false accusations based on constitutional Confrontation Clause rights despite K.S.A. 60-422[d] restrictions). The panel unanimously held that Swint failed to preserve tire claim related to the…”
State v. Webber, 918 P.2d 609 (Kan. 1996). · cites it 5× “In relevant part, K.S.A. 60-422 provides: “As affecting the credibility of a witness .”
State v. Davis, 697 P.2d 1321 (Kan. 1985). · cites it 6× “Moreover, in this case, unlike Nixon , the proffered testimony was not inadmissible under any subsection of K.S.A. 60-422. The general rule for attacking a witness's credibility, K.”
State v. Murrell, 585 P.2d 1017 (Kan. 1978). · cites it 7× “K.S.A. 60-422 provides: "As affecting the credibility of a witness ( a ) in examining the witness as to a statement made by him or her in writing inconsistent with any part of his or her testimony it shall not be necessary to show or read to the witness any part of the writing…”
State v. Campbell, 423 P.3d 539 (Kan. 2018). · cites it 2× “The court and the prosecutor then discussed what type of testimony is permissible under K.S.A. 60-422. 8 At some point in the discussions, defense counsel interjected that his suspicion was the State would call Morehead and ask, "[D]id [Rudisill] testify and did [Rudisill] tell…”
State v. Manning, 19 P.3d 84 (Kan. 2001). · cites it 2× “” *686 Where a party has been entrapped or deceived by an artful or hostile witness, he or she may examine such witness as to whether the witness had not previously made contrary statements, and may, in the discretion of the court, be permitted to show what the contrary…”
State v. Patton, 120 P.3d 760 (Kan. 2005). · cites it 3× “The defendant argues the State’s use of a specific instance of Pratt’s conduct from a previous court case to impeach her character was prohibited by K.S.A. 60-422, which provides in relevant part: “As affecting the credibility of a witness .”
Show all 90 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 60-422(a) — 3 cases
State v. Hunter, 740 P.2d 559 (Kan. 1987).
State v. Wright, 603 P.2d 1034 (Kan. Ct. App. 1979).
State v. Stinson, 227 P.3d 11 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010).
— K.S.A. § 60-422(b) — 12 cases
State v. Angelo, 197 P.3d 337 (Kan. 2008).
State v. Hernandez, 159 P.3d 950 (Kan. 2007).
State v. Manning, 19 P.3d 84 (Kan. 2001). “” *686 Where a party has been entrapped or deceived by an artful or hostile witness, he or she may examine such witness as to whether the witness had not previously made contrary statements, and may, in the discretion of the court, be permitted to show what the contrary…”
State v. Carter, 91 P.3d 1162 (Kan. 2004).
State v. Drayton, 175 P.3d 861 (Kan. 2008).
— K.S.A. § 60-422(c) — 24 cases
State v. Frantz, 521 P.3d 1113 (Kan. 2022). “Relevant here, K.S.A. 60-422 excludes evidence of any character trait other than honesty or veracity, and it prevents a party from establishing a witness' character traits through specific instances of conduct: "As affecting the credibility of a witness .”
State v. MacOmber, 769 P.2d 621 (Kan. 1989).
State v. George, 466 P.3d 469 (Kan. 2020).
State v. Sweat, 48 P.3d 8 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002).
State v. Davis, 697 P.2d 1321 (Kan. 1985). “Moreover, in this case, unlike Nixon , the proffered testimony was not inadmissible under any subsection of K.S.A. 60-422. The general rule for attacking a witness's credibility, K.”
— K.S.A. § 60-422(d) — 34 cases
State v. Atkinson, 80 P.3d 1143 (Kan. 2003). “The rules of evidence, specifically K.S.A. 60-422, prohibit their admission. The majority relied upon K.”
State v. Penn, 201 P.3d 752 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009). “” K.S.A 60-422 limits the admissibility of evidence affecting the credibility of a witness.”
State v. Swint, 352 P.3d 1014 (Kan. 2015). “2d 1288 (1989) (holding victim in sex crime case may be cross-examined about prior false accusations based on constitutional Confrontation Clause rights despite K.S.A. 60-422[d] restrictions). The panel unanimously held that Swint failed to preserve tire claim related to the…”
Khalil-Alsalaami v. State, 486 P.3d 1216 (Kan. 2021).
State v. Frantz, 521 P.3d 1113 (Kan. 2022). “Relevant here, K.S.A. 60-422 excludes evidence of any character trait other than honesty or veracity, and it prevents a party from establishing a witness' character traits through specific instances of conduct: "As affecting the credibility of a witness .”
— K.S.A. § 60-422(fe) — 1 case
State v. Heiskell, 666 P.2d 207 (Kan. Ct. App. 1983).
— K.S.A. § 60-422(h) — 1 case
State v. Hobson, 671 P.2d 1365 (Kan. 1983).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.